What's The Argument For Lemieux Over Orr?

[Gorskyontario]

That is flat out false though.

No it isn't.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think the best explanation for Bowman's take is that he was almost entirely focused on per-game stats and disregarding total career contributions.

I don't think he focused on stats at all.

He saw everything he needed to.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Of course accepting that Bowman's list is not a joke is an appeal to authority to some degree. He's literally the foremost authority on the subject. As for the rest, his list of not objectively bad. Every single list is subjective other than a ranking of players by assists or goals or points of penalty minutes etc. It does the history section no favours to disregard the list of Scotty Bowman, not to say that everyone does.

I think some posters here need to put their hubris aside and accept Scotty Bowman knows more about winning hockey games.

Later picks in his list, it's fair to assume he probably didn't put too much thought into. His top 15-25 however.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I think some posters here need to put their hubris aside and accept Scotty Bowman knows more about winning hockey games.

Later picks in his list, it's fair to assume he probably didn't put too much thought into. His top 15-25 however.

This. The ego going on with those thinking they have a smarter/better/more knowledgeable list than Scottie Bowman is absurd

 

[Midnight Judges]

I don't think he focused on stats at all.

He saw everything he needed to.

Fair enough. Change the statement to "per-game contributions at their best" then.

Because it's obvious longevity didn't factor for much in his equation.

This. The ego going on with those thinking they have a smarter/better/more knowledgeable list than Scottie Bowman is absurd

That need not be the case though.

It's pretty clear Bowman was focused on "best" as opposed to "greatest."

It's not that any of us think we know more. It's that our rating criteria is different.

 

[Midnight Judges]

No it isn't.

Alright well feel free to dispute any of my supporting rationale.

I mean, you can't, but go ahead and try.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Fair enough. Change the statement to "per-game contributions at their best" then.

Because it's obvious longevity didn't factor for much in his equation.



That need not be the case though.

It's pretty clear Bowman was focused on "best" as opposed to "greatest."

It's not that any of us think we know more. It's that our rating criteria is different.

Pittsburgh Penguins 1987-88 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1987-88 Pittsburgh Penguins playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Edmonton Oilers 1982-83 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1982-83 Edmonton Oilers playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Picked their 4th seasons, since it was Lemieux 1st art ross. I would love to hear, outside of 46 games of Paul Coffey. How these are comparable supporting casts.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Alright well feel free to dispute any of my supporting rationale.

I mean, you can't, but go ahead and try.

If you know more than Scotty Bowman, I'm curious if you had a coaching or management career in the NHL?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Pittsburgh Penguins 1987-88 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1987-88 Pittsburgh Penguins playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Edmonton Oilers 1982-83 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1982-83 Edmonton Oilers playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Picked their 4th seasons, since it was Lemieux 1st art ross. I would love to hear, outside of 46 games of Paul Coffey. How these are comparable supporting casts.

You want to place a high value Lemieux's "accomplishments" on a team that missed the playoffs back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in?

That team didn't accomplish anything other than being piss poor.

When Lemieux did finally have team success, he did it with Jagr, Recchi, Murphy, Mullen, Trottier, Coffey, and Barasso - all hall of famers. And yes, that is comparable to Gretzky's SC supporting casts.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I understand the argument more for turning longevity “off” (Orr) than turning injuries “off” (Lemieux), which I understand to be related but not quite the same (as you can look at % of available games played during certain stretches in a career) and both different than idk turning inconsistency “off” (think someone like Ovechkin with great longevity and low injuries alongside a great peak but with more inconsistency than say, Crosby, who he entered the league at the same time as and has same point totals while being unlucky with not having an opportunity to enter any sooner despite being nearly two full years older).

 

[Gorskyontario]

You want to place a high value Lemieux's "accomplishments" on a team that missed the playoffs back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in?

That team didn't accomplish anything other than being piss poor.

When Lemieux did finally have team success, he did it with Jagr, Recchi, Murphy, Mullen, Trottier, Coffey, and Barasso - all hall of famers. And yes, that is comparable to Gretzky's SC supporting casts.

Lemieux winning the Art Ross with that supporting cast is an accomplishment. Scotty Bowman knows that.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Lemieux winning the Art Ross with that supporting cast is an accomplishment. Scotty Bowman knows that.

Peak Wayne Gretzky would have had no problem accomplishing that same thing.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

You want to place a high value Lemieux's "accomplishments" on a team that missed the playoffs back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in?

That's a bit of a lark - the Penguins weren't competing with 20 other teams for a playoff spot. Specifically, in the 1987-88 season that keeps being thrown around, the Penguins finished with more points than nine other teams (so finished 12th out of 21).

1987-88 National Hockey League [NHL] standings at hockeydb.com

The standings of the teams in the National Hockey League for the 1987-88 season

www.hockeydb.com

They just happened to be in a Patrick Division where two teams missed the playoffs each year (instead of the one that missed the playoffs in every other division), and in perhaps the tightest division of the divisional era (I haven't checked, but the division winner had 88 points and the last-place Penguins had 81).

 

[blogofmike]

You are confusing most valuable player with best player.

Bobby Clarke won two Hart Trophies over Orr. He probably was more valuable to his team, but he wasn't a better player than Orr. And neither was Espo when he won it.

Or Clarke had a stronger performance in 1974-75.

74-75 Opponents	Clarke GP	Clarke PTS	Clarke +/-	Orr GP	Orr PTS	Orr +/-
vs Top 5 Teams	16​	19​	13​	20​	24​	-4​
vs Middle 6 Teams	41​	53​	38​	36​	60​	34​
vs Bottom 5 Teams	23​	44​	28​	24​	51​	50​

This was also the year he was on for only 19 ESGA. If you watch Game 6 of the Finals from 1975 (not in the voting period, but perhaps indicative of his usage) there's a stretch where the Sabres get 3 powerplays in a row, and the Flyers just keep sending Clarke out for the faceoffs. (I think the 3rd kill ends with a Sabres penalty).

Over the season, Clarke's on for 70% of his team's PPGA. And in spite of being shorthanded 120 more times than second place, the Flyers are still the team with the lowest GA.

But, if you want to go with the guy who had big points totals, that's cool.

The Bowman list makes more sense when you know

1) he's not ranking top but best and it's different
2) he values defensive play a lot
3) he didn't put the time in that this forum does

There are lots of oddities. Like for someone who loves defensive play Richard at 3 is odd. Or Morenz in front of Beliveau. The list isn't internally consistent but that doesn't mean it carries zero value.

Don't worry about Beliveau and Morenz. Bowman changed his mind on that too. (Also has 7 guys ahead of Hasek apparently.)

NHL 100: Gretzky, Brodeur, Bowman select all-time greats

He's a great coach, (I mean, he's no Phil Jackson), not a great listmaker.

Ask him again today and he'll have different names.

"Mario's the best player who ever lived".

- Scotty Bowman, 2023

Close enough.

I don't know... If Bowman's rationale for Lemieux is roughly equal to Gretzky was primarily eye test-driven or based on some fascinating information that the public isn't privy to, it would be more compelling.

But I mean, you see people on message boards saying things like Gretzky played on loaded teams, was surrounded by Hall of Famers etc. I don't think the fact that he's the greatest coach ever necessarily makes his opinion on the matter infallible if it is based on reasoning like that. I stand by what I said earlier: I think Gretzky is clearly more accomplished. Lemieux played on some teams that were loaded with HHOFers himself, and I think Jagr is easily better than a guy like Kurri.

Based on the translation provided by @overpass it might be based on an inaccurate memory.

A lot of people who don't look it up think Messier, Kurri, Coffey, and Fuhr were all there and all great from day one. They remember the Cups, they don't remember that for all the help he was supposedly getting, Gretzky had a bigger scoring lead over Jari Kurri or Glenn Anderson than Mario Lemieux had over Rob Brown.

Pittsburgh Penguins 1987-88 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1987-88 Pittsburgh Penguins playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Edmonton Oilers 1982-83 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1982-83 Edmonton Oilers playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Picked their 4th seasons, since it was Lemieux 1st art ross. I would love to hear, outside of 46 games of Paul Coffey. How these are comparable supporting casts.

Well, that's all well and good, but why not use Gretzky's first season, when he tied for the lead in points?

1979-80 Oilers

Or year 2, his first Ross win?

1980-81 Oilers

The names, get better, even if the point totals don't.

What's also notable about the 80-81 season, is that Gretzky hits 104 ES points. That ties Lafleur for the record, and is more than anyone else ever got, including a 199 point Mario Lemieux.

Steve Young used to say the most dangerous pass rusher he ever faced was "the unblocked one."

Similarly, the best teammate you can have to score goals, would be the extra man. Lemieux played with the extra man more than anyone else ever did (until 2006). You chose 1983 and 1988. Let's look at that span.

Powerplay Chances, 1983-88

Well wouldn't you know who's #1 in PP chances, and the only team to hit 500 in a season? The 1988 Penguins,

The 1983 Oilers are 115th out of 126. Not their lowest showing, but pretty low, and less than 60% of 88 Pittsburgh.

In 1983, Gretzky scores 132 even-strength points, 40 more than 2nd place Peter Stastny.

Things are different in 1988, as Gretzky missed 20% of the season, playing in 64 games.

In 1988, Gretzky scores 91 even-strength points, 17 more than 2nd place Mario Lemieux.

 

[Midnight Judges]

That's a bit of a lark - the Penguins weren't competing with 20 other teams for a playoff spot. Specifically, in the 1987-88 season that keeps being thrown around, the Penguins finished with more points than nine other teams (so finished 12th out of 21).

1987-88 National Hockey League [NHL] standings at hockeydb.com

The standings of the teams in the National Hockey League for the 1987-88 season

www.hockeydb.com

They just happened to be in a Patrick Division where two teams missed the playoffs each year (instead of the one that missed the playoffs in every other division), and in perhaps the tightest division of the divisional era (I haven't checked, but the division winner had 88 points and the last-place Penguins had 81).

Yes, that's a fair point.

 

[jigglysquishy]

From Bowman

"“A lot has to do with excitement. Before Gretzky, before expansion — and I lived through this — the argument always was, who’s the better player, Howe or Richard? This is what people always said: If you want to fill your building, you pick the Rocket. If you want to win championships, you pick Howe."

Filling seats means nothing to me when ranking players. This is a pretty strong compliment to Howe.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Or Clarke had a stronger performance in 1974-75.

74-75 Opponents	Clarke GP	Clarke PTS	Clarke +/-	Orr GP	Orr PTS	Orr +/-
vs Top 5 Teams	16​	19​	13​	20​	24​	-4​
vs Middle 6 Teams	41​	53​	38​	36​	60​	34​
vs Bottom 5 Teams	23​	44​	28​	24​	51​	50​

This was also the year he was on for only 19 ESGA. If you watch Game 6 of the Finals from 1975 (not in the voting period, but perhaps indicative of his usage) there's a stretch where the Sabres get 3 powerplays in a row, and the Flyers just keep sending Clarke out for the faceoffs. (I think the 3rd kill ends with a Sabres penalty).

Over the season, Clarke's on for 70% of his team's PPGA. And in spite of being shorthanded 120 more times than second place, the Flyers are still the team with the lowest GA.

But, if you want to go with the guy who had big points totals, that's cool.


Don't worry about Beliveau and Morenz. Bowman changed his mind on that too. (Also has 7 guys ahead of Hasek apparently.)

NHL 100: Gretzky, Brodeur, Bowman select all-time greats

He's a great coach, (I mean, he's no Phil Jackson), not a great listmaker.

Ask him again today and he'll have different names.



Close enough.

Based on the translation provided by @overpass it might be based on an inaccurate memory.

A lot of people who don't look it up think Messier, Kurri, Coffey, and Fuhr were all there and all great from day one. They remember the Cups, they don't remember that for all the help he was supposedly getting, Gretzky had a bigger scoring lead over Jari Kurri or Glenn Anderson than Mario Lemieux had over Rob Brown.


Well, that's all well and good, but why not use Gretzky's first season, when he tied for the lead in points?

1979-80 Oilers

Or year 2, his first Ross win?

1980-81 Oilers

The names, get better, even if the point totals don't.

What's also notable about the 80-81 season, is that Gretzky hits 104 ES points. That ties Lafleur for the record, and is more than anyone else ever got, including a 199 point Mario Lemieux.

Steve Young used to say the most dangerous pass rusher he ever faced was "the unblocked one."

Similarly, the best teammate you can have to score goals, would be the extra man. Lemieux played with the extra man more than anyone else ever did (until 2006). You chose 1983 and 1988. Let's look at that span.

Powerplay Chances, 1983-88

Well wouldn't you know who's #1 in PP chances, and the only team to hit 500 in a season? The 1988 Penguins,

The 1983 Oilers are 115th out of 126. Not their lowest showing, but pretty low, and less than 60% of 88 Pittsburgh.

In 1983, Gretzky scores 132 even-strength points, 40 more than 2nd place Peter Stastny.

Things are different in 1988, as Gretzky missed 20% of the season, playing in 64 games.

In 1988, Gretzky scores 91 even-strength points, 17 more than 2nd place Mario Lemieux.

Pittsburgh Penguins 1984-85 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1984-85 Pittsburgh Penguins playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Yeah 100 points playing with the corpse of Wayne Babych and a bunch of AHL fodder. Did you look at those mid 80s pens teams?

Peak Wayne Gretzky would have had no problem accomplishing that same thing.

Can you prove this? Gretzky always had an excellent supporting cast really until his last few years in LA, and especially the last 2 seasons in new york.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Can you prove this? Gretzky always had an excellent supporting cast really until his last few years in LA, and especially the last 2 seasons in new york.

Post peak Gretzky scored 54 goals and 168 points on a fairly mediocre Kings team. So I mean yeah that's close enough for me.

 

[blogofmike]

Pittsburgh Penguins 1984-85 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

The roster, scoring and goaltender statistics for the 1984-85 Pittsburgh Penguins playing in the NHL.

www.hockeydb.com

Yeah 100 points playing with the corpse of Wayne Babych and a bunch of AHL fodder. Did you look at those mid 80s pens teams?



Can you prove this? Gretzky always had an excellent supporting cast really until his last few years in LA, and especially the last 2 seasons in new york.

And how long did MacDonald and Callighen stay in the NHL after leaving Edmonton?

Yet still, Gretzky hits 100 even-strength points. As he would in 10 of his first 12 seasons (1980-91, or pre-Suter). He also scored 90+ in the 2 seasons where he missed time, but was on pace for 100. No Oiler ever scored as many total points in as season as Gretzky had even strength points (unless we extend the time period to include Connor McDavid).

With an ES/PP/SH split of 100/35/2, I'd say Gretzky comes out ahead of Lemieux's 67/33/0 on a team with 363 PP chances (the Oilers never saw that many chances until 1988.)

So it's not an example of Lemieux doing more with less, it's an example of him doing far less, with about as much.

Lemieux's 100 overall points is impressive for a rookie. It's 8 more than Mike Bullard got on a worse team the year before. But in terms of accomplishments it's not impressive enough to be relevant a Lemieux v. Orr comparison, unless you want to compare first seasons, in which case, they're both good, but Orr's is better. (Though 1985 is probably not in Lemieux's Top 10 best seasons.)

 

[blogofmike]

To me, outright dismissing Lemieux and Orr compared to Gretzky as if we were calling out names like Norm Ullman or Pierre Turgeon where it's like, "yeah, no chance, pal..." is a failure in the evaluation process. And/or an over-reliance on counting stats...in which case, I'd frame that under "failure in the evaluation process".

That's not to say that having Gretzky at 1 is wrong by any means. But the notion that anything else is unreasonable doesn't give me a lot of confidence in the mental process/processor of the folks saying it...

This is fair, but many of us have thought about these things enough to the point where something that's much closer, we can say Sakic > Yzerman, and that's that.

From here:

Here's a (very long) post from 2008 that compares both of their careers in detail. The conclusion is, although it's close, it's also fairly clear that Sakic has had the better career. I agree with that - close but still clear in favour of Sakic.

Ever Wonder Which Of Sakic and Yzerman is Better?

From here:

Conclusion:

Joe Sakic has had a career that is slightly yet decidedly and clearly better than that of Steve Yzerman. He scored wins in 17 of the 24 categories analyzed (11 decisively), while Yzerman won four categories, one decisively. Three categories were declared draws. keep in mind that some categories are much more important than others; however, Sakic wins most of the most important ones.

From here:

1. Sakic
2. Trottier
3. Yzerman

Sakic easily beats the other 2 in longevity as an elite player, and (by a smaller margin) has the best playoff record as well.

Sakic and Trottier over Yzerman because they were both at their offensive and defensive bests at the same time.

From here:

• Steve Yzerman

Below Sakic. That probably has been covered a lot, though perhaps should be reiterated. Thinking above Trottier. Beats Trottier on longevity. Brought a lot of the same intangibles later on in his career. Yzerman was more of an independent variable in point production, and demonstrated that he could produce with linemates of varying quality. In a round with representation from arguably the 2nd best players from the Bread Line, Production Line, and Trio Grande, it should be noted that Steve Yzerman posted a Pearson-winning campaign with Gerard Gallant and Paul Maclean.

It's really more about those who haven't taken a deep dive and shared a compelling rationale. For those who have, like the posters I quoted above (maybe not the last guy), I don't mind shorthand arguments.

 

[norrisnick]

From Bowman

"“A lot has to do with excitement. Before Gretzky, before expansion — and I lived through this — the argument always was, who’s the better player, Howe or Richard? This is what people always said: If you want to fill your building, you pick the Rocket. If you want to win championships, you pick Howe."

Filling seats means nothing to me when ranking players. This is a pretty strong compliment to Howe.

And ranking via filling seats is the only way Mario sits higher than 4th.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Post peak Gretzky scored 54 goals and 168 points on a fairly mediocre Kings team. So I mean yeah that's close enough for me.

That wasn't post prime and that roster had several high caliber players on it.

 

[blogofmike]

Does anyone want to take a crack at comparing Orr and Lemieux as actual players? A player isn't a series of accomplishments or checks on a list. Orr was a better skater, the degree to which he was better is the interesting point. Orr was obviously a lot better defensively. Lemieux had the better shot. What else?

Do we want to do a watch along?

This is the best regular season game footage from 1970-71 I saw.


There's also this, but it's fuzzier, and that can be annoying.


I searched "Penguins 1989" on YouTube. After skipping the Jets and Super Series game, (not a good enough team, and an exhibition) I was going to post an Oilers game from 1988-89, but when I checked the results, Lemieux scored 7 points and that might not be fair.

Next hit was Game 5 against the Flyers. 8 points. Nope.

Then there's his first playoff game, where he gets 1 assist. Maybe that's a candidate.

A Wings-Pens Game from February looked fun, with a Yzerman matchup, but 4 points.

A couple of 89-90 games, then a February game against the Flyers with 2 points.

More 89-90 stuff, and then a very clipped game against the Gretzky Kings. 2 points. Not good quality, but it might help dispel the notion that the 1970s were rough and filled with line brawls, while the 1980s were soft (fighting peaked in 1988 or so).

I might leave it to someone else to find a suitable game to watch.

 

[blogofmike]

That wasn't post prime and that roster had several high caliber players on it.



I'm sorry but this post somehow makes less than zero sense.

@Midnight Judges clearly said peak, not prime.

----

As far as making sense goes, you might want to change your favourite response line.

In short, Gretzky's season was a far better accomplishment. 137 points and tying Dionne is a level above 100 points, finishing 13th, 1 point back of Paul MacLean.

Gretzky's linemates weren't of a superior quality to Lemieux's.

Lemieux had a lot of PP chances.

Lemieux had better support than Mike Bullard did on the 1984 Penguins, where Bullard scored 92 points.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Lemieux had better support than Mike Bullard did on the 1984 Penguins, where Bullard scored 92 points.

Mike Bullard was in the prime of his career. Mario Lemieux was fresh out of junior.

I don't really understand what point you are trying to make here.

Gretzky's linemates weren't of a superior quality to Lemieux's.

Yes they were.